| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Specific Homebrew settings and houserules are irrelevant in these comparisons.
That's not how things normally work.
But that's how they appear to work for the vast majority on this forum - Golarion is interpreted as the land where fireballs are heaved down the streets regularly (and there must be magical urinals, if that's the case). I see all the time examples of characters who at 19th level (or some other high number) all of a sudden discover their long lost (heretofore unknown or unexpressed) aberrant sorcerous bloodline. Amazing! And adventurers have this uncanny knack for adventuring for a while with no sign of magical ability, then suddenly becoming a wizard! Apprentice wizards everywhere cry out in protest! The adventures I read that were set in Golarion didn't appear to be uber magical societies (and support the premise that without magic you're a waste of adventuring party space).
If noting as a way to improve the Rogue class, and various Martial classes, then I suppose it is not too far from the discussion.
My point is that all of the adults I play with or know play, run settings where there is sociological support for non-spellcasters. There are many times where you shouldn't be able to cast spells due to societal pressure (or social norms), much less as a way of tipping your hand that you're ensorcelling those around you. Common sense and some semblance of medieval continuity are important components, as well. It's great that your bard can sing out and buff themselves and everyone around them - but how much of the dungeon complex will be piling in to that room just a few rounds later? There should be a balance to rewarding players for using mundane means to achieve their ends, too.
Heck, many call out the Wizard as the most powerful class in the game, but dayammm you can make a worthless wizard really easy. Rogues are practically foolproof in comparison.That Wizard will be worthless for a day, exactly. Next day, he just prepares different spells
If they are in his spellbook.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.
A whopping one or two times per day. As always, you continue to promote the sheer amazing power of Rogue talents.
A whopping one or two times per day. As always, you continue to promote the sheer amazing power of Rogue talents.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.
A 4th level bard with a 18 CHA can cast Invis twice a day- and no other 2nd level spells.
A 4th level Ninja with a 14 CHA can do it 4 times a day. With one feat 6 times. AND it's Su and Swift. That makes it the equiv of a 6th level spell, as it's Quickened.Win- Rogue.
Fast Stealth = Expeditious Retreat
Hide In Plain Sight = Blur
Misdirection < Glibness
Effortless Sneak < Invisibility
Using your goalposts a Bard is better at this than a Chameleon. And they have more skills by level 6 due to Versatile Performance. And they can Inspire Courage. And they know other spells than these...
Uhhhhh what exactly are your comparisons supposed to mean here?
Expeditious Retreat only grants you a + 30 to speed. You would still
take a ranged attack to the back. With Stealth you wouldn't.
Blur grants a 20% miss chance while Hide in Plain Sight grants you a 100% miss chance if they can't find you.
Invisibility is not better at Stealth because Invisibility can be foiled very easily and only lasts a certain number of rounds.
I'm afraid spells aren't the end all because they are limited and can be foiled rather easily.
Let's not forget that a Bard is limited in it's spells and choose them like a sorcerer. Saying you can take X spell is great when you are given an example scenario, but you can't predict what's going to happen throughout the campaign. For every spell you take, you lose out on one you could have taken that would have been good for another scenario.
A whopping one or two times per day. As always, you continue to promote the sheer amazing power of Rogue talents.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.A 4th level bard with a 18 CHA can cast Invis twice a day- and no other 2nd level spells.
A 4th level Ninja with a 14 CHA can do it 4 times a day. With one feat 6 times. AND it's Su and Swift. That makes it the equiv of a 6th level spell, as it's Quickened.Win- Rogue.
Okay, 1st: Rogues cannot pick Invisibility with Major Magic, as it's a level 2 spell. At best, pick Vanish, with it's "30 seconds, tops" duration.
At that level, that Bard can use Invisibility twice per day, plus Vanish four times per day.
2nd, notice how people comment on the weaknesses of the Rogue? Notice how those exact same people point to the Ninja as a better Rogue?
Who needs Invisibility when you've got Stealth?
|
A whopping one or two times per day. As always, you continue to promote the sheer amazing power of Rogue talents.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.A 4th level bard with a 18 CHA can cast Invis twice a day- and no other 2nd level spells.
A 4th level Ninja with a 14 CHA can do it 4 times a day. With one feat 6 times. AND it's Su and Swift. That makes it the equiv of a 6th level spell, as it's Quickened.Win- Rogue.
Archaeologist and Negotiator Bard has access to the exact same thing.
Win- Bard. ;)
Then set them both in the Mana Waste and watch the Rogue kick the Bard's ass from the Western Ravage to the Sea. Hands down. Without magic, the Rogue is better. A little worse on Knowledge skills, given. But otherwise, the "Arcane Bard" has nothing on it without the magic.
Actually, the Rogue is worse. The Rogue is very item dependent.
Archeologist's Luck is Extraordinary, so it functions fine in the Mana Wastes, as does his use of the Arcane Strike feat. The Bard will even have better saves.
All classes are item dependent so what's your point?
They are a design point of the game and are assumed to be a part of every character. Might want to use a better excuse than that.
|
|
Then set them both in the Mana Waste and watch the Rogue kick the Bard's ass from the Western Ravage to the Sea. Hands down. Without magic, the Rogue is better. A little worse on Knowledge skills, given. But otherwise, the "Arcane Bard" has nothing on it without the magic.
Actually, the Rogue is worse. The Rogue is very item dependent.
Archeologist's Luck is Extraordinary, so it functions fine in the Mana Wastes, as does his use of the Arcane Strike feat. The Bard will even have better saves.
All classes are item dependent so what's your point?
They are a design point of the game and are assumed to be a part of every character. Might want to use a better excuse than that.
Excuse?? He suggested that in an Antimagic Field, that somehow the Rogue goes Super Saiyan, and everyone else cries at their uselessness.
I am simply noting, that is not true.
|
Who needs Invisibility when you've got Stealth?
Who needs one or the other when you have both? Even DrDeth is espousing the value of the Ninja's Invisibility, or as it's known, everyone's firs ninja trick. One or the other is nice, but invisibility lets you stealth in well lit hallways with no cover, while stealth...doesn't. It requires HIPS (At Lv 10+)/Hellcat Stealth (with a -10) to even get close to that.
Bard/Alchemist win out easily there, since they can have both without much effort at all. I mean stealth is nice if it's the only thing you've got, but if you could have more, especially for the things you'd want to be hidden for (scouting which could be suicidal, battle), wouldn't you want to be good at hiding in plain sight instead of unable to do it.
Fast Stealth = Expeditious Retreat
Hide In Plain Sight = Blur
Misdirection < Glibness
Effortless Sneak < Invisibility
Using your goalposts a Bard is better at this than a Chameleon. And they have more skills by level 6 due to Versatile Performance. And they can Inspire Courage. And they know other spells than these...
Uhhhhh what exactly are your comparisons supposed to mean here?
Expeditious Retreat only grants you a + 30 to speed. You would still
take a ranged attack to the back. With Stealth you wouldn't.Blur grants a 20% miss chance while Hide in Plain Sight grants you a 100% miss chance if they can't find you.
Invisibility is not better at Stealth because Invisibility can be foiled very easily and only lasts a certain number of rounds.
I'm afraid spells aren't the end all because they are limited and can be foiled rather easily.
Let's not forget that a Bard is limited in it's spells and choose them like a sorcerer. Saying you can take X spell is great when you are given an example scenario, but you can't predict what's going to happen throughout the campaign. For every spell you take, you lose out on one you could have taken that would have been good for another scenario.
Fast Stealth lets you move at full speed while being stealthy.
Expeditious Retreat doubles your speed, so your half speed = normal full speed. And then you can still move at +30 to former full speed. Win to Exp Retreat.Hide IN plain sight lets you hide while being observed.
Blur gives you concealment. Concealment lets you hide. So, with blur up, you can hide while being observed, AND you get a 20% miss chance. Win = Blur.
Effortless Sneak is take 10 on a Stealth Check in a specific terrain.
Invisibility is +20 to Stealth check, so take 0 still wins. Win = Invisibility. And it's not terrain dependent, either.
Those are the points he was trying to make. More to the point, all these spells can be cast on other people, too, I believe?
==Aelryinth
Rogues can easily raise their UMD, take the Magic Talents, and start taking the various item creation feats.
I can have a rogue that can Stealth perfectly, find and disable all traps no problem, Sneak Attack, use it's many other various skills, cast spells as a Wizard, Cleric, Druid, etc...
The buffs of a Bard are cool but they aren't crucial to winning so saying they are more important is bogus. Bards have to take time getting their buffs cast just like any other caster, or do they all just happen to enter battle all prepared and ready to roll.
You don't have to Stealth, find traps and disable them all day. You have to do those things when you need to do them.
And that isn't an infinite number of times. The baseline is actually 5...an item usable 5 times a day is priced the same as a one usable permanently or at will, because it's assumed to be used as many times a day as you are going to need it.
In reality, it will likely be needed much, much less then that.
This is the same problem with the fighter vs barbarian. Just because weapon spec lasts all day, all the time, doesn't mean it's better then a barbarian's more limited rage rounds. Most people will argue the exact opposite. The barbarian doesn't have to waste rage rounds when not fighting, and a fighter's weapon spec does him no good if he isn't fighting, either.
Likewise, a non-full BAB class that can buff itself up to awesome fighting capacity is perfectly viable in the game, as long as it lasts long enough to do the job. see wildshape druid and mutagen pumping alchemist, judgement/bane inquisitor, full buffing cleric, etc.
==Aelryinth
Fast Stealth = Expeditious Retreat
Hide In Plain Sight = Blur
Misdirection < Glibness
Effortless Sneak < Invisibility
Using your goalposts a Bard is better at this than a Chameleon. And they have more skills by level 6 due to Versatile Performance. And they can Inspire Courage. And they know other spells than these...
Uhhhhh what exactly are your comparisons supposed to mean here?
Expeditious Retreat only grants you a + 30 to speed. You would still
take a ranged attack to the back. With Stealth you wouldn't.Blur grants a 20% miss chance while Hide in Plain Sight grants you a 100% miss chance if they can't find you.
Invisibility is not better at Stealth because Invisibility can be foiled very easily and only lasts a certain number of rounds.
I'm afraid spells aren't the end all because they are limited and can be foiled rather easily.
Let's not forget that a Bard is limited in it's spells and choose them like a sorcerer. Saying you can take X spell is great when you are given an example scenario, but you can't predict what's going to happen throughout the campaign. For every spell you take, you lose out on one you could have taken that would have been good for another scenario.
Fast Stealth lets you move at full speed while being stealthy.
Expeditious Retreat doubles your speed, so your half speed = normal full speed. And then you can still move at +30 to former full speed. Win to Exp Retreat.Hide IN plain sight lets you hide while being observed.
Blur gives you concealment. Concealment lets you hide. So, with blur up, you can hide while being observed, AND you get a 20% miss chance. Win = Blur.Effortless Sneak is take 10 on a Stealth Check in a specific terrain.
Invisibility is +20 to Stealth check, so take 0 still wins. Win = Invisibility. And it's not terrain dependent, either.Those are the points he was trying to make. More to the point, all these spells can be cast on other people,...
Expeditious Retreat has a time limit and can be dispelled. Fast Stealth is unlimited and can never be dispelled. Always WIN!
Bluff + Stealth: Can be done an unlimited number of times per day. Always WIN!
Skill Mastery: Take 10 on a Stealth check anywhere and anytime. Always WIN!
A whopping one or two times per day. As always, you continue to promote the sheer amazing power of Rogue talents.
And you guys do know a rogue can go invis also? Cost two talents if Core rogue, but easy for the Ninja rogue archetype.A 4th level bard with a 18 CHA can cast Invis twice a day- and no other 2nd level spells.
A 4th level Ninja with a 14 CHA can do it 4 times a day. With one feat 6 times. AND it's Su and Swift. That makes it the equiv of a 6th level spell, as it's Quickened.Win- Rogue.
Oh you mean the Ninja Alternate class. I have no issues with the ninja, was responding in regards to the core rogue comment. A rogue's pool is wisdom based and unlikey to have more than a 14 so you get 2 uses of vanishing trick.
Id kindly ask you to not bring up the Ninja as I do not bring up the Samurai in Cavalier discussions.
You don't have to Stealth, find traps and disable them all day. You have to do those things when you need to do them.
And that isn't an infinite number of times. The baseline is actually 5...an item usable 5 times a day is priced the same as a one usable permanently or at will, because it's assumed to be used as many times a day as you are going to need it.
In reality, it will likely be needed much, much less then that.
This is the same problem with the fighter vs barbarian. Just because weapon spec lasts all day, all the time, doesn't mean it's better then a barbarian's more limited rage rounds. Most people will argue the exact opposite. The barbarian doesn't have to waste rage rounds when not fighting, and a fighter's weapon spec does him no good if he isn't fighting, either.
Likewise, a non-full BAB class that can buff itself up to awesome fighting capacity is perfectly viable in the game, as long as it lasts long enough to do the job. see wildshape druid and mutagen pumping alchemist, judgement/bane inquisitor, full buffing cleric, etc.
==Aelryinth
That all depends on what kind of games the DM runs. That is why these arguments have no true basis because all classes run differently based on the types of games that are run.
As I noted, being able to do it always is unnecessary. Being able to do it when needed is the key. The fact you can do it when it is unnecessary to do so effectively means nothing.
The fact a fighter can put out a million HP of damage over the course of a day means nothing if he doesn't have something willing to stand there and get hit.
==Aelryinth
Who needs Invisibility when you've got Stealth?Who needs one or the other when you have both? Even DrDeth is espousing the value of the Ninja's Invisibility, or as it's known, everyone's firs ninja trick. One or the other is nice, but invisibility lets you stealth in well lit hallways with no cover, while stealth...doesn't. It requires HIPS (At Lv 10+)/Hellcat Stealth (with a -10) to even get close to that.
Bard/Alchemist win out easily there, since they can have both without much effort at all. I mean stealth is nice if it's the only thing you've got, but if you could have more, especially for the things you'd want to be hidden for (scouting which could be suicidal, battle), wouldn't you want to be good at hiding in plain sight instead of unable to do it.
Rogue + Vanish equals hidden.
Stealth + Bluff equals hidden.
So you have to beat a monster's perception check with base skill ranks, and its usually a maxed ability?
AND you have to beat them on a Bluff check of interminable DC to distract them long enough to hide, and you still need cover?
Not seeing it.
==Aelryinth
As I noted, being able to do it always is unnecessary. Being able to do it when needed is the key. The fact you can do it when it is unnecessary to do so effectively means nothing.
The fact a fighter can put out a million HP of damage over the course of a day means nothing if he doesn't have something willing to stand there and get hit.
==Aelryinth
But spellcasters can't do it all the time. They are limited in how often they can do it and if they have the right spells.
It's all fine and dandy for someone to present a scenario and you list off some spells the Bard "could" have at the time, but that's not how a game is actually run.
So you have to beat a monster's perception check with base skill ranks, and its usually a maxed ability?
AND you have to beat them on a Bluff check of interminable DC to distract them long enough to hide, and you still need cover?
Not seeing it.
==Aelryinth
If you don't see it then I would suggest you look a bit more closely.
Monsters don't usually have their ranks maxed out. A low level rogue can easily have a Stealth and Bluff high enough to get the job done. A well built rogue can have a Stealth score in the 50's while Skill Mastery would allow them to auto take 10. Most creatures around 10th level don't have that kind of Perception.
Maxing skills is easy to do for a rogue.
FS, you're being presented with a Rogue alternate, i.e. a character built to do what a Rogue can do.
They will have the spells, the capability to cast them, and all of the key Skills that a Rogue has, because they'll be built to replace a Rogue.
In addition, they can have spells that do things the Rogue cannot do.
That's the whole point here.
ON TOP OF THAT...a wizard could just memorize the right spells and pull off being a Rogue fairly well, for today. Tomorrow, he could be the fighter.
Suckeths.
==Aelryinth
Bards are spontaneous casters. If they know the spell, they always have it when needed. If they are building for stealth, they will know the spell.
That's fine, but a Bard built for Stealth does what else exactly when it could be built for something better? You are sacrificing spells known to try and achieve something the rogue can already do without. I would go tell the Bard player to better focus his attention elsewhere and leave the scouting to the rogue.
So you have to beat a monster's perception check with base skill ranks, and its usually a maxed ability?
AND you have to beat them on a Bluff check of interminable DC to distract them long enough to hide, and you still need cover?
Not seeing it.
==Aelryinth
If you don't see it then I would suggest you look a bit more closely.
Monsters don't usually have their ranks maxed out. A low level rogue can easily have a Stealth and Bluff high enough to get the job done. A well built rogue can have a Stealth score in the 50's while Skill Mastery would allow them to auto take 10. Most creatures around 10th level don't have that kind of Perception.
Maxing skills is easy to do for a rogue.
If he fails one time in 4, it's still a failure. He also has to make both checks every time, against every creature, for this to work.
and if you've sacrificed to get +40 and higher Stealth and bluff by level 10, you're going to be hurting in other areas. It's a tradeoff. Sure, the +15 Stealth armor helps a lot, but that's $ not being spent elsewhere.
At higher levels, some of those monsters have crazy percept mods. The average is full ranks in Percept, not less, as you go up in level.
Bards are spontaneous casters. If they know the spell, they always have it when needed. If they are building for stealth, they will know the spell.That's fine, but a Bard built for Stealth does what else exactly when it could be built for something better? You are sacrificing spells known to try and achieve something the rogue can already do without. I would go tell the Bard player to better focus his attention elsewhere and leave the scouting to the rogue.
And he would tell you his Bard is doing the scouting, AND then doing other stuff the ROgue can't do.
==Aelryinth
|
|
/QUOTE]
Rogue + Vanish equals hidden.
Stealth + Bluff equals hidden.
Neither of those things are Rogue exclusive, one requires 2 Rogue Talents to do once a day, and the other...not really sure where bluff is coming in, are you feigning to make a distraction to hide?
After a while, stealth just isn't as valuable, when extra senses start getting more common. Darkvision is the first, since there's no hiding in shadows, tremorsense wrecks non flying (read: most) Rogues, so even as a 'thing', stealth isn't a high level tactic, especially for a Rogue. Spells on the other hand, limited as they are, rarely go out of style.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
FS, you're being presented with a Rogue alternate, i.e. a character built to do what a Rogue can do.
They will have the spells, the capability to cast them, and all of the key Skills that a Rogue has, because they'll be built to replace a Rogue.
In addition, they can have spells that do things the Rogue cannot do.
That's the whole point here.
ON TOP OF THAT...a wizard could just memorize the right spells and pull off being a Rogue fairly well, for today. Tomorrow, he could be the fighter.
Suckeths.
==Aelryinth
And we have seen Wizard alternatives, Cleric alternatives, Fighter alternatives etc on these boards.
Is it time to retire those characters and say they suck?
I really don't think some of you truly get the concept of an RPG. If you already have a fighter in your party, your wizard needs to focus on something else, same goes with the rogue or any other class.
Pathfinder, or any RPG for that matter, is not about looking for those top few builds, and then throwing everything else out because these builds can "do it better".
Also, these arguments don't take into account a level 1 through 20 campaign. Again, it's all about being given a scenario and someone going to look through all these options in the books and find a little build that can handle it. My DM doesn't use the same scenarios over and over again so most of the builds would be SOL if they were relying on certain circumstances.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
/QUOTE]
Rogue + Vanish equals hidden.
Stealth + Bluff equals hidden.
Neither of those things are Rogue exclusive, one requires 2 Rogue Talents to do once a day, and the other...not really sure where bluff is coming in, are you feigning to make a distraction to hide?
After a while, stealth just isn't as valuable, when extra senses start getting more common. Darkvision is the first, since there's no hiding in shadows, tremorsense wrecks non flying (read: most) Rogues, so even as a 'thing', stealth isn't a high level tactic, especially for a Rogue. Spells on the other hand, limited as they are, rarely go out of style.
LOL!!!!
Rogue exclusive he says.
Jesus you people are unreal. Thanks be to god you don't represent the overall gaming community.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Insults only show the weakness of your arguments, FS. Please keep that in mind when you are being rude.
What you're doing is classic Oberoni Fallacy, confusing Roleplaying with mechanical effectiveness. It's not going to fly here.
==Aelryinth
|
|
LOL!!!!
Rogue exclusive he says.
Jesus you people are unreal. Thanks be to god you don't represent the overall gaming community.
What's "LOL" mean?
I'm not really sure what you mean by this, since pointing out the flaws of a class that's inherently unable to fill its own niche.
I think the issue is that there's two bars here:
1) The Rogue is weaker than everything else.
2) The Rogue fails at the objectives given to it.
For 1, that happens, something's always at the bottom, used to be the monk, but that got fixed. But 2 is the real issue. As you've stated, it's not impossible for one thing to replace another, that's the game. But generally there's a bit more of a trade off for doing so. A social Wizard isn't summoning as many Balors, a healing Oracle can't put down as much damage as a regular one.
But for overshadowing the Rogue, little effort needs to be expended, which is the problem. I can make an Alchemist that would accomplish roguish things without breaking a sweat. And the thing is, I don't really need to go out of my way to do that, it's pretty basic, just throw on Vivi and season to taste. With a Bard, an archetype isn't even needed, although Archaeologist does seal the deal.
I honestly don't see 1 as a problem, but 2 is a large problem, and one that I would like to see fixed.
LOL is internet speek for Laugh Out Loud.
==Aelryinth
|
Look, you are fixating on the Class name instead of the role. The rogue class is 3/4 BAB, Some talents, Sneak Attack, Evasion, and Skills.
The rogue role is someone who is stealthy, can be somewhat effective in combat, can be skilled, and can deal with traps.
The Archeologist bard is better at filling the Rogue role than the rogue.
The Vivesectionst Alchemist is better at filling the rogue role than the rogue.
The Trapper and Urban Ranger is better at filling the rogue role than the rogue.
This isn't even touching the ACG classes, or Seeker archetype Oracles & Sorcerers.
Class is not role. Class is a collection of abilities that you use to portray your role. The thing we are all saying is the rogue class abilities are not as suited to portraying the rogue role as SIX other classes.
The rogue should be the best rogue there is. But instead it takes a huge amount of system mastery to make one functional, and even then, several other classes fill the role with less effort.
